Relatively recently, researchers observed that double stranded RNA (“dsRNA”) could be used to inhibit protein expression. This ability to silence a gene has broad potential for treating human diseases, and many researchers and commercial entities are currently investing considerable resources in developing therapies based on this technology.
Double stranded RNA induced gene silencing can occur on at least three different levels: (i) transcription inactivation, which refers to RNA guided DNA or histone methylation; (ii) siRNA induced mRNA degradation; and (iii) mRNA induced transcriptional attenuation.
It is generally considered that the major mechanism of RNA induced silencing (RNA interference, or RNAi) in mammalian cells is mRNA degradation. Initial attempts to use RNAi in mammalian cells focused on the use of long strands of dsRNA. However, these attempts to induce RNAi met with limited success, due in part to the induction of the interferon response, which results in a general, as opposed to a target-specific, inhibition of protein synthesis. Thus, long dsRNA is not a viable option for RNAi in mammalian systems.
More recently it has been shown that when short (18-30 bp) RNA duplexes are introduced into mammalian cells in culture, sequence-specific inhibition of target mRNA can be realized without inducing an interferon response. Certain of these short dsRNAs, referred to as small inhibitory RNAs (“siRNAs”), can act catalytically at sub-molar concentrations to cleave greater than 95% of the target mRNA in the cell. A description of the mechanisms for siRNA activity, as well as some of its applications are described in Provost et al. (2002) Ribonuclease Activity and RNA Binding of Recombinant Human Dicer, EMBO J. 21(21): 5864-5874; Tabara et al. (2002) The dsRNA Binding Protein RDE-4 Interacts with RDE-1, DCR-1 and a DexH-box Helicase to Direct RNAi in C. elegans, Cell 109(7):861-71; Ketting et al. (2002) Dicer Functions in RNA Interference and in Synthesis of Small RNA Involved in Developmental Timing in C. elegans; Martinez et al., Single-Stranded Antisense siRNAs Guide Target RNA Cleavage in RNAi, Cell 110(5):563; Hutvagner & Zamore (2002) A microRNA in a multiple-turnover RNAi enzyme complex, Science 297:2056.
From a mechanistic perspective, introduction of long double stranded RNA into plants and invertebrate cells is broken down into siRNA by a Type III endonuclease known as Dicer. Sharp, RNA interference—2001, Genes Dev. 2001, 15:485. Dicer, a ribonuclease-III-like enzyme, processes the dsRNA into 19-23 base pair short interfering RNAs with characteristic two base 3′ overhangs. Bernstein, Caudy, Hammond, & Hannon (2001) Role for a bidentate ribonuclease in the initiation step of RNA interference, Nature 409:363. The siRNAs are then incorporated into an RNA-induced silencing complex (RISC) where one or more helicases unwind the siRNA duplex, enabling the complementary antisense strand to guide target recognition. Nykanen, Haley, & Zamore (2001), ATP requirements and small interfering RNA structure in the RNA interference pathway, Cell 107:309. Upon binding to the appropriate target mRNA, one or more endonucleases within the RISC cleaves the target to induce silencing. Elbashir, Lendeckel, & Tuschl (2001) RNA interference is mediated by 21- and 22-nucleotide RNAs, Genes Dev. 15:188, FIG. 1.
The interference effect can be long lasting and may be detectable after many cell divisions. Moreover, RNAi exhibits sequence specificity. Kisielow, M. et al. (2002), Isoform-specific knockdown and expression of adaptor protein ShcA using small interfering RNA, J. Biochem. 363:1-5. Thus, the RNAi machinery can specifically knock down one type of transcript, while not affecting closely related mRNA. These properties make siRNA a potentially valuable tool for inhibiting gene expression and studying gene function and drug target validation. Moreover, siRNAs are potentially useful as therapeutic agents against: (1) diseases that are caused by over-expression or misexpression of genes; and (2) diseases brought about by expression of genes that contain mutations.
Successful siRNA-dependent gene silencing depends on a number of factors. One of the most contentious issues in RNAi is the question of the necessity of siRNA design, i.e., considering the sequence of the siRNA used. Early work in C. elegans and plants circumvented the issue of design by introducing long dsRNA (see, for instance, Fire, A. et al. (1998) Nature 391:806-811). In this primitive organism, long dsRNA molecules are cleaved into siRNA by Dicer, thus generating a diverse population of duplexes that can potentially cover the entire transcript. While some fraction of these molecules are non-functional (i.e., induce little or no silencing) one or more have the potential to be highly functional, thereby silencing the gene of interest and alleviating the need for siRNA design. Unfortunately, due to the interferon response, this same approach is unavailable for mammalian systems. While this effect can be circumvented by bypassing the Dicer cleavage step and directly introducing siRNA, this tactic carries with it the risk that the chosen siRNA sequence may be non-functional or semi-functional.
A number of researches have expressed the view that siRNA design is not a crucial element of RNAi. On the other hand, others in the field have begun to explore the possibility that RNAi can be made more efficient by paying attention to the design of the siRNA.
To treat various diseases or disorders, the upregulation of certain proteins is desirable but this may not be all that is needed. For example, the combinatorial use of siRNA to knock down or knock out expression of an endogenous protein or a different protein may be needed. The present invention fulfills this need and provides methods of treating cancer, especially multiple myeloma.
Cancer, including multiple myeloma are diseases which would benefit from the ability to induce apoptosis. Conventional therapies for of multiple myeloma include chemotherapy, stem cell transplantation, high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell transplantation, and salvage therapy. Chemotherapies include treatment with Thalomid® (thalidomide), bortezomib, Aredia® (pamidronate), steroids, and Zometa® (zoledronic acid). However many chemotherapy drugs are toxic to actively dividing non-cancerous cells, such as of the bone marrow, the lining of the stomach and intestines, and the hair follicles. Therefore, chemotherapy may result in a decrease in blood cell counts, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and loss of hair.
Conventional chemotherapy, or standard-dose chemotherapy, is typically the primary or initial treatment for patients with of multiple myeloma. Patients also may receive chemotherapy in preparation for high-dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplant. Induction therapy (conventional chemotherapy prior to a stem cell transplant) can be used to reduce the tumor burden prior to transplant. Certain chemotherapy drugs are more suitable for induction therapy than others, because they are less toxic to bone marrow cells and result in a greater yield of stem cells from the bone marrow. Examples of chemotherapy drugs suitable for induction therapy include dexamethasone, thalidomide/dexamethasone, VAD (vincristine, Adriamycin® (doxorubicin), and dexamethasone in combination), and DVd (pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil®, Caelyx®), vincristine, and reduced schedule dexamethasone in combination).
The standard treatment for of multiple myeloma is melphalan in combination with prednisone (a corticosteroid drug), achieving a response rate of 50%. Unfortunately, melphalan is an alkylating agent and is less suitable for induction therapy. Corticosteroids (especially dexamethasone) are sometimes used alone for multiple myeloma therapy, especially in older patients and those who cannot tolerate chemotherapy. Dexamethasone is also used in induction therapy, alone or in combination with other agents. VAD is the most commonly used induction therapy, but DVd has recently been shown to be effective in induction therapy. Bortezomib has been approved recently for the treatment of multiple myeloma, but it is very toxic. However, none of the existing therapies offer a significant potential for a cure. Thus, there still remains a need to find a suitable treatment for cancer and multiple myeloma. The present invention fulfills this need.